click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
LANGUAGE
English 67
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 67 (some duplicates have been removed)
've been told the cia had been telling susan rice? >> i think the real problem for general petraeus in this story is that it not only does not mesh with what the white house was saying, it doesn't mesh with what we're told general petraeus said in the immediate aftermath, where he is said to have talked about a spontaneous flash mob. >> to members of congress. >> to members of congress behind closed doors as well and this is the problem. it's not only that we know that that's not true now, it's that at the time there were a lot of other indications that indicate that was not true, denied by the libyan prime minister, the cia station chief called it an act of terror. we had the fbi and i believe the national center for counterterrorism also giving briefings. >> paul: that's right. >> saying this. why was general petraeus's testimony then so at odds with other parts of the community? >> but does this, would this give-- what does it mean for, say, susan rice and the administration then? is this, does this help them politically by shielding them or does petraeus here saying i thought it
lindsey graham giving his view of ambassador susan rice and her role in the administration spin on the benghazi terror attacks and the president's reactions to those statements at his first news conference since being reelected. mr. obama, defending ms. rice, but his defense has actually added more to the controversy. senator graham reacted to the president by saying, mr. president, don't think for one minute i don't hold you responsible for benghazi, i think you failed as commander-in-chief before, during and after the attack. so much to get to first on this, jim, the showdown between the two senators, graham and mccain and the president. abc's terry moran called it an obama smackdown. "the washington post" john mccain's benghazi, and some say it's about mccain being bitter about losing to obama four years ago. >> i think five names and a conflagration, and number one petraeus and broadwell and number two, benghazi, benghazi, petraeus, broadwell, military ethics, mccain obama reduction, and fifth, the susan rice story, which life imitates art. if you go back and watch the movie
parts of the community? >> but does this, would this give-- what does it mean for, say, susan rice and the administration then? is this, does this help them politically by shielding them or does petraeus here saying i thought it was a terrorist attack, does that mean this puts, for example, susan rice's statements more up to scrutiny? >> well, i think answers the fundamental question, did they deliberately mislead on this case for political reasons because they were driving the narrative that al-qaeda had been decimated and the war, war was receding or a question of incompetence. neither of those two things is good for the administration although it's after the election, so, they can get the consequences. >> let's take a look at the president talking about susan rice, the u.n. ambassador who many think he will nominate to succeed hillary clinton as secretary of state. >> for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. >> paul:
now. >> ambassador susan rice descends on capitol hill to explain why she blamed the benghazi massacre on a youtube video. lieliz cheney has more as the benghazi cover-up unravels. and more states legalize marijuana. so is an increase in revenue really fueling this movement or is a cultural shift to blame? we'll debate it. and the protests in cairo, the white house refuses to condemn the egyptian president's dictator-like grab. all of that, and a "hannity" shootout with juan williams and more. "hannity" starts right now. tonight as the fiscal cliff drama unfolds on capitol hill, we'll take a step back and look at how we got to this point. namely, how do we become a nation buried under more than $16 trillion debt, why crippling defense cuts, and the largest tax increase will take hold in 35 days because your elected officials don't know how to stop spending money. let me first play a small part of one of the most memorable inaugural addresses of all time. >> my fellow americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. >> sean: sadly five decades r
was taken out of the final version that we believe was ultimately given to the u.n. ambassador, susan rice. why was that done? who did this? catherine herridge is live on capitol hill. reporter: that's right. congressional horses tell fox news that there were changes to the cia talking points and that language of al qaeda affiliated individuals was replace -- replaced, which have the impact of minimizing or downplaying the role of al qaeda and another group, al sharia come on the consulate on 9/11. there was also testimony this week that the intelligence community to those talking points and went to an interagency process. so that other elements of the intelligence community as well as input and review by the state department, as well as the department of justice, that eventually made its way to ambassador susan rice. no one commissioner who was the final author of this talking point given to ambassador susan rice, who is on the sunday talk show on september 16 and repeated on multiple occasions that meant david was in response to the anti-islam video and that was a demonstration that had
for susan rice. somebody is blatantly lying. we'll get to the bottom of that and much more as "hannity" continues. [ male announcer ] research suggests cell health plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day men's 50+ is a complete multi-vitamin designed for men's health concerns as we age. it has more of 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day men's 50+. to support cell health. try running four.ning a restaurant is hard, fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase. i took my son fishing every year. we had a great spot, not easy to find, but worth it. but with copd making it hard to breathe, i thought those days might be over. so my doctor prescribed symbicort. it helps significantly improve my lung function starting within five minutes. symbicort doesn't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden symptoms. with symbicort, today i'm breathing better.
for susan rice. somebody is blatantly lying. we'll get to the bottom of that we'll get to the bottom of that and much more as "hannnnnnnnnnnn try running four.ning a restaurant is hard, fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase. >>> welcome back to hannity. the main street media continue to take their liberal position on the israeli/palestinian conflict. you won't believe it, but watch this. >> living under the threat of rocket attack is search a psych logical trauma. what would you say to those that the rogh rockets rarely do damad the response of the israelis is disproportionate. >> i would say to the ones who have been killed, the 150 who have been wounded, these rockets pair lies an entire ken. there is no school. people cannot go out of their houses, out of their bomb shelters. again, that's an ultimate terly intolerable situation for any country.
, the talking points of susan rice saw in the next 48 hours before she appeared on the sunday talk shows said it was mob violence and video. what do you make of that, tucker? >> this was the big revelation of the day as far as i can tell. it's not clear that susan rice didn't see the original talking points, but the administration conceded today all, but conceded, said, flat-out, we know that al-qaeda was involved, and the term al-qaeda was listed in the origin tell againintelligen and taken out. and the administration says al-qaeda or affiliates classified information, so they had to be scrubbed from what was given to congress. and even if you accept that's a legitimate operating procedure, you have to acknowledge that they've intentionally misled, susan rice-- >> who is they? >> susan rice, but clearly the cia knew this. it's inconceivable that the american ambassador to the united nations was sent out on television with totally incomplete information, with talking points that had been basically scrubbed and having no knowledge of what was originally in them. >> is it clear that susan rice
by the cia and what was ultimately embraced to am bass sore susan rice. what we mean here is there was a review process and an editing process in which the emphasis on extremist groups, al-qaida, an sar al says sharia was deemphasized in the second version used by ambassador rice. at what point did the former cia director believe that this was an act of terrorism or an act of extremists? a s*r member of the committee told fox a sort time ago was what the director laid off was an evolving picture on intel kwrepbs. >> he reinforced the facts -- in the first 24 hours he felt at that point, or the cia felt at that point that this was a protest as a result of what happened with the film. he clarified that after -- after more information came in there was not a protest. >> reporter: one lawmaker telling fox after the hearing that he did feel that there were discrepancies between the former cia director's statements today about what he said on september 14th, and the recollection of that lawmaker. let's listen. >> his testimony today was that from the start he had told us that th
like yourself talk that this issue is much bigger than susan rice. let me drill down on one area here. because yesterday the cia acting director at 10:00 a.m. apparently blamed the fbi for changing the language and the guidance and the talking points. at 4:00 in the afternoon the cia acting director came back and said it was at cia after all. what explains that? >> this stuff is coming from the white house. they are hoping this will go away. i don't happen to be one of the senators she cares to talk about and maybe it's because while opposed to her from her position as ambassador of the united nations and nothing could change my mind on that. bill: based on that answer it appears you are willing to take that answer higher than susan rice with it comes to benghazi. >> this will go down as the biggest coverup in history. they all knew it. they are hoping to have it go beyond the election date which it did. but people are not going to forget it. the administration deliberately covered this and misrepresented what happened in benghazi threatened up in the both of four people. one of whom
some of her biggest critics. ambassador susan rice goes to capitol hill this hour where she will meet with republican lawmakers who have been furious with her initial remarks on libyan terror attack. how will this story go? that is our lead morning. i'm bill hemmer. martha: i'm martha maccallum. about five days after our consulate was attacked on september the 11th we all remember ambassador rice went on all five sunday shows and said the killing of the ambassador and three other americans was actually the result of a spontaneous mob sparking outrage, those comments did, from top gop lawmakers including these three senators, mccain, graham and ayotte. >> don't we all have the responsibility before we go out and talk to the american people on all five sunday morning shows for verifying those facts are true? >> the most basic information about what happened on the night of the attack, and what survivors had to say after the attack is not being provided and we'll talk more about that. bill: so you wonder then whether or not they will get the answers they're looking for. whether or not so
-style hearings on the attack on the consulate in benghazi and if you nominate susan rice as secretary of state they will do everything they can to block the nomination. he says he simply doesn't trust her. >> i won't comment at this point on various nominations that i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the second term. those are things that are being discussed. but let me say specifically about susan rice. she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator tbram and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence she received, and besmir much her reputation is outrageous. and, you know, afte
and law enforcement officials. what was clear was the president's comments on ambassador susan rice is really getting some traction. one republican alleging that, quote, the president misinformed and lied to the american people over the benghazi affair. what was also clear is that the president wants to promote ambassador susan rice. even though she said benghazi was a spontaneous attack when it seemed clear it was terrorism. >> president obama has the gal to float the name of secretary of state, the name of the person who is the actual vehicle used to misinform the person disash dasht american people during this crisis. >> that's a reference to ambassador rice's appearance less than a week after the benghazi attack. the republicans charge that the story was not that strays forward and rice got her information from the cia and other agencies. >> these unfair attacks on ambassador susan rice are simply wrong. she had to rely on the intelligence that was provided. i sat here while colin powell provided the intelligence that he had regarding weapons of mass destruction in iraq. >> the
nominee. >> these unfair attacks on ambassador susan rice are simply wrong. she had to rely on the intelligence that was provided. i sat here while colin powell provide the the intelligence that he had regarding weapons of mass destruction in iraq. >> then you have the audacity to come here and say why wasn't the protection of these people provided for? and the answer is because you dam didn't provide it. >> the sun doesn't come up until 6:52. the 7:30 a.m. start time for the petraeus hearing on the house side is the earliest hearing. high profile or otherwise that he has ever seen. back to you in new york. >>> peter doocy, thanks. 7:30 they think that it early. come on guys. let's get started. >>> staying with the very serious topic of the benghazi hearings we are going to take a look at who is talking. the video was captured drone surveillance. what it means and the investigation into the attack that killed four americans. >> what it did was confirm the fact that there was a bunch of bad guys who stormed this consulate in benghazi some ca y carrying automatic weapons othe
. that doesn't gel too well together. >> two things came out. susan rice was given talking points and this is what we know and they sent her out on the five talk show. the question remains and james clapper yesterday couldn't answer it and acting cia director morell couldn't tell. who put those talking points and time line who said it is a video. is it state intele, or the white house? one of them has to come on. >> gretchen: maybe it was a fog of politics? >> you are putting the cia deputy in the political world. she got a unclassified briefing. why would the cia give the un ambassador who is representing the white house an unclassified briefing. >> gretchen: she is a spokes person for the united states of america and she has an unclassified briefing? i guess you could argue in the slimmest of margins that you wouldn't want to scare the american people and hide what was really going on and say it was another terrorist attack. >> there is one problem with the whole debate. the day before susan rice went on the talk shows, on the 14th. leon paneta secretary of defense with the defe
yesterday defending u.n. ambassador susan rice for her response in the days following the terrorist attack in benghazi in what has now become one of the largest conflicts for his administration, at least on the terrorism front. the president's remarks yesterday raise new questions over the conflicting accounts from the white house about the deadly attack. here's why. on september 11th, four americans were killed -- you know that now -- in our consulate in benghazi, including our ambassador. it was a terrorist attack. on the 16th of september, five days later, ambassador rice went on five sunday shows, including fox news sunday, and suggested that the attack was linked to an internet video. >> best assessment we have today is that, in fact, this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack, that what happened initially was it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in cairo as a consequence of the video. megyn: when challenged yesterday on the story that ms. rice told several networks, the president said he, the white house, sent her out there with that explanation. >> as i've s
to sppd to the rumor that ambassador susan rice is being considered to replace hillary clinton as secretary of state. needless to say, he wasn't too fond of that suggestion, considering rice is the one who appeared on five sunday shows, blaming the benghazi attack on a youtube video. >> this is about the role she played around four dead americans when it seems to be that the story coming out of the administration and she is point person, is so disconnected to reality, i don't trust her. the reason i don't trust her is because i think she knew better. and if she didn't know better, f america. somebody has to start paying a price around this place. but i am dead set on making sure we don't promote anybody who was an essential player in the benghazi debacle. >> sean: it appears our president, mr. sensitive, took great offense to the critique. take a look at the very angry response. >> she made an appearance at the request of the white house, in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others w
susan rice and he basically was really offended that anybody would criticize susan rice for her statements that she made on the sunday shows and he said, you know, why is she being cite sized she went on these shows she knew nothing about benghazi. >> bill: why did she go on the shows then. >> right. exactly which raises the question. >> bill: let me set it up in case people didn't see it okay. >> bill: senator mccain and lindsey graham of south carolina are threatening to block the nomination of susan rice if the president wants her to be secretary of state which i don't think is going to harassment i don't know why he wants that. >> right. >> bill: the president got mad and said ambassador rice is a great american and if you are going to blame anyone blame me but you can't blame me because it's all under investigation and the investigation clear me when we get around to telling you about it which will probably be in 13 years. >> he did kind of the same thing in that republic presidential debate. instead of susan rice it was hillary clinton. the week leading up to that there ha
meant for the susan rice appearance recentlyally contain the information that there was evidence of al qaeda's elements involved in this attack. but it appears as if those talking points were altered by the white house or somebody close to the white house to remove any reference to al qaeda's involvement in the attacks. we have yet to discover who has changed the talking points to make the president look for favorable and mislead you, by falsely labeling the 9/11 attacks over spontaneous mob over the video. petraeus has no idea what was provided to rice or who was the author of the talking points that she used that, he had no idea she was going on the talk shows until the white house announced it one or two days before. now, the looming question is, in this coverup, who did it? now, earlier, fox's own katherineererridge explained where the talking points went once they left the cia. >> what we are told about the talking points is that it went through an inter-agency review, including the department of justice, the state department, agencies and that at the end of the day you have this
of susan rice? is hurt future in limbo because of libya? two years ago, the people of bp made a commitment to the gulf. bp has paid over twenty-three billion dollars to help those affected and to cover cleanup costs. today, the beaches and gulf are open, and many areas are reporting their best tourism seasons in years. d bp's also committed to america. we support nearly 250,000 jobs and invest more here than anywhere else. we're working to fuel america for generations to come. our commitment has never been stronger. looking back if it wasn't for shriners hospital,. things would just be really, really different. i lost my leg when i was a kid. there was a time when i felt like i wasn't going to be able to walk again... it was a pretty bad accident but shriners showed me who i could be again. they turned my whole life around. hunter's life is one of nearly a million changed by donations from people like you. send your love to the rescue. donate today. reporter: i would like to bring in michael sing who is the washington director for north east policy. we have this breaking news on israel. th
is is who exexunged the al qaeda terrorism line before it was given to susan rice and she was sent out on those five sunday morning talk shows to say no it was actually a film and a riot gone bad. so as you know there were a couple of senators who say that they have lost faith with susan rice. that she went out and said something misleading. but the president, at his first press conference since being reelected said, please, don't blame her, in fact, he went so far to say she had nothing to do -- knee knew nothing about benghazi. she had nothing to do with benghazi. here he is defending susan rice. >> she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. >> so. >> okay. then why the heck did you send her out there? she knew nothing about what happened. petraeus was in washington. several other high ranking officials who knew what happened were in washington. if you want us to go after you, then
anxiety. bill: who changed the talking points on benghazi before susan rice hit the talk show circuit and peter king wants answers. he's here live in minutes. >> the talking point were drafted to. they said after it went through the process, which they seemed unclear about, that was taken out. . because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and it finds one, you get refunded the difference. just use your citi card and register your purchase online. have a super sparkly day! ok. [ male announcer ] now all you need is a magic carriage. citi price rewind. buy now. save later. bill: hamas is saying the conflict is all the fault of israel. fan it wants the violence to end it needs to give in to the group's demands. we just spoke to the israeli ambassador and he says the burden is on hamas. >> there is in country on earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders. we are fully supportive of israel's right to defend
. >> let me say specifically about susan rice, she has done exemp plear work. as i said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house, in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. >> why did you pick her to tell us about benghazi? what does she have to do with benghazi? did anybody ask her for additional security? she's the united nations ambassador. >> you don't end up on every single major sunday show without affirmatively putting yourself out there of wanting to carry forward a message on behalf of the administration. >> i don't think we are doing very well in the u.n., quite frankly. they did a good job on libya, but china and russia are walking all over us. i think she is more political operative than anything else, when it comes to benghazi. >> one of the questions here is really who in different parts of our government knew what about what happened? knew the faces about what happened in benghazi on 9/11 and did they s
on the talking points, megan, which came from the cia, the famous talking points that supposedly susan rice relied on, they said talk came from cia, specifically mentioned al-qaeda and that al-qaeda was involved in the attack. and they left the cia, went to a whole process which i believe included the white house, and when the talking points were finalized all the the references to al-qaeda were taken out. >> and a lot to get through. let's start with greg. first of all, and petraeus testified under oath he knew within 24 hours it was al-qaeda or terrorism and this one, the talking points. >> i know, general petraeus is a wrecking crew right now. no one has done this much damage behind closed doors since ron jeremy and the question whether president obama was incompetent or hiding something and now we know, he's incompetent on hiding something. and we know that susan rice on talk shows was a big serving of baloney risotto. >> they protected the president by department the justice saying we didn't think it was important enough or a risk. >> they're covering it up because of the fact there wa
was asked about susan rice being the person that went out on point, on that sunday following the attacks. why the ambassador from the united nations would be the person, not the director of national intelligence, not the cia director, not the national security director. the secretary safety or the vice-president, but the u.n. ambassador and when asked and challenged about her testimony, this is what the president said and then i'm going to get your reaction to it. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me, but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. >> mike: now, to quote shakespeare, me thinks the man doth protest too much. and to me a legitimate question and then go after senators graham and mccain. >> a little paternalistic and left out one of the senators, a senator kelly ayotte who happens to be a female and i find it instructive that he left her out of his cri
susan rice. he does not know who the author of the final version was and these talking points would be uses as the basis for the statements on sunday talk shows on september 16th that this was spontaneous event and linked to the anti-islam video. lawmakers said they wanted to stay very focused on the attack itself and not the former director's personal problems. >> human nature is what it is but the intent going we'll limit the conversation to the events of 9/11 and forward throughout the rest of the, six, eight weeks ensued since the attacks on our consulate. >> reporter: in addition to what's unfolding here on capitol hill fox news separately has confirmed the cia has begun a preliminary investigation into the former director's tenure at the cia. that would include whether any cia assets or materials if you will were used to facilitate this affair or alleged affair with his biographer, paula broadwell, bill. bill: a lot of people look at this on the outside and look at today as a day where you might be able to settle some things but in all honesty how much will be settled after to
attacks on ambassador susan rice are simply wrong. she had to rely on the intelligence that was provided. ultimately state department personnel have to rely on the intelligence reports they are given. susan rice' integrity, capacity and record are beyond question. >> now, president... obamga has the call to float the name as possible secretary of state, the name of the person who was the actual vehicle used to misinform the american people during this crisis. >> greta: a new internal cia investigation of dave petraeus. a week ago, he resigned after the extra-marital affair with paula broadwell. but today, the sex scandal got weirder. jill kelley told a reporter she had breakfast at the white house on september 28. the claim has not been verified. john bolton is here. good evening, sir. >> good evening. >> greta: first, your overall thought about what transpired on capitol hill, in terms of the release behind closed doors today? >> well, i think the most interesting testimony that has leaked out -- do i have faith the rest of it will leak out in due course, is that the director of nationa
president obama defended u.n. ambassador susan rice who was criticized for her remarks immediately following this attack. she is reportedly in contention to succeed hillary clinton as our secretary of state, take a listen. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmurch her reputation is outrageous. jenna: senator john cornyn of texas what's elected to be the senate's minority whip, a bit of a promotion if you will. thanks to have you back on the program. >> thank you, jenna, good to be with you. jenna: your reaction on what the president had to say yesterday in. >> i thought it was an overreaction to say the least. congress has a constitutional responsibility under our system of checks and balances to consider any nominations to an executive branch position, like secretary of state. the president knows that. i us
. >> administration officials about cabinet shuffles aimed at susan rice will face in the u.s. senate if as reported she is tapped as secretary of state. >> i think there would be an organized effort by a number of senators to make sure susan rice is not confirmed as secretary of state should the president these not to nominate her. you have to have tough questions to see susan rice failed that test. >> a hand with particular interest in genocide rice has faced sharp scrutiny when she appeared on five shows press ago narrative on the benghazi attack that has since been discounted as false. >> does the president have confidence that rice could conquer future cabinet posts? >> i will not engage in speculation about personnel matters. >> the president believes ambassador rice has done an excellent job and is grateful for her service. >> oo senator john kerry the democratic presidential nominee and foreign relations committee serving as defense secretary. the vietnam veteran who turned against the war he through away the medals he had been awarded and would be in the position to award such medals today.
that information, susan rice either didn't have it or use it when she went on the talk shows sunday. >> mike: one of the questions is, who is the they? are we closer to knowing that? did this go to the white house? was this done within the internal operations of the cia, at the state department? did you -- can you give us insight as to who it was who authorized and put their hands to the document and said we've got to scratch this out? >> no, sir we can't that. is a subtragedy to a larger tragedy that government can scrub out salient relevant information and we are no closer to knowing who did it and why. i suspect we know why. we are no closer to knowing who. i would say we've had two hearings now, one closed and one open. we have only just begun. i understand the need to have closed door hearings for classified information. but this is the same administration that wants to try terrorists in open court, with full discovery in front of the media in new york city. we are going to have open hearings as soon as we get back as soon as the new congress is convened. we are going to have open hearings t
to something that was just asked. about susan rice. if she was to go before a confirmation hearing -- >> for you i'll break the hypothetical rule. >> nobody 0 else. >> thank you. if she were to go before a senate confirmation hearing could she answer questions with a simple yes? are questions answerable? >> i'm not sure what you're asking, april. again, i'm not going to speculate about personnel matters and who will or will not be participating in nomination hearings. you know, i can tell you that the president believes that ambassador rice has done an excellent job, as the united states ambassador to the united nations, and i believe that -- and i know that he believes that everyone here working for him has been transparent and in the way that we've tried to answer questions about what happened in benghazi and going back to briefings that we had again and again, that the information that we provided was based on the available assessments at the time, and as those assessments evolved and became more detailed and clear we provided additional information, and that was certainly true
, when susan rice and the others said we got the intelligence, they were being fed the intelligence by general petraeus's cia. >> greta: what would be the motive? if general petraeus is saying on the 14th, if he is on friday, the 14th of september, telling capitol hill, it's a video. but within 24 hours of the event, back-dating to september 12, his own station chief, it is reported by the associated press -- not fox, but kim dozier, the cia station chief in libya says it's evidence it was carried out by militant, no mention of a mob upset about a video. what happened between the 12th and the 14th? >> general petraeus was the one that went up and told the congress this t. look like the central intelligence agency generally and general petraeus specifically moved this story. i would not be surprised if susan rice testified and the white house guys testify that general petraeus was the one giving them this intelligence. there is another issue here. i have had to undergo full-field fbi investigation into the nixon white house. they went to your college and everything else. that full fi
deliberately misled. now i get into surmise. it sounds to me like, when susan rice and the others said, we got this intelligence, they were being fed this intelligence by general petraeus' cia. >> greta: what would be the motive? if general petraeus is saying on the 14th -- friday, the 14th of september, he is telling capitol hill, it's a video, but within 24 hours of the event, back-dating it to september 12, his own station chief, it is reported by the second quartered press, not fox, the this, ia -- cia station chief in libya says there is evidence that it is carried out by militants. no indication of a mob upset about a video. >> you know, general petraeus was the one that went up and told the congress this. it looks to me like the centrallibleigence agency generally and general petraeus specifically, moved this story. i would not be surprised if susan rice testifies and the white house guys testify to the effect that general petraeus was giving them this intel jeps. there is another issue here. i have to undergo full field fbi investigation when i went into the nixon white house. they wen
by the white house, and who was he in tact with, and susan rice-- >> what about that, what do you think he knows specifically and do you think he's the one that provided the information where susan rice went out and told everybody, no, no, video, it's due to a video? >> well, general-- a general took a hit for that, and no way he'd take that hit for that, and general petraeus was part of that process. i have respect for him. great american hero and patriot and his testimony is essential, he could say i wasn't at that meeting only petraeus would have known exactly what happened at that time. >> jamie: there's many, congressman king, who agree with you, that general petraeus is essential to getting answers on what happened to four americans who were killed and why. and so, the question is, the timing. and they knew about his extramarital affair, it would appear before the election, we didn't learn about it until after, he didn't resign until after. is there more to this? >> jamie, i can't accept this whole story, first of all, when did the investigation begin? and if the fbi is surveilling t
votes in ohio. seems pretty presumptuous. he went after susan rice. some were trying to block her as secretary of state. >> senator mccain and graham and others want to go after to somebody, they should go after me. for them to go after the u.n ambassador who has nothing to do with ben gay you swree -- benghazi and was making a presentation based on information she had received, the smirk-sherm reputation is outrageous. >> phony outrage. mccain, graham and others do what they say is spreading the white house message and it was not terrorism. and mccain addressed obama's remarks saying he understood the president was not happy with him, but -- >> this president -- this administration has been guilty of caw loss sal incompetence or engaged in a cover up. >> meanwhile, earlier mccain was asked if there is a security threat that exceeded that of the libya attack. >> i say with great respect that is one of the dumbest questions i have ever heard. >> thank god he said it with great respect. >> you were saying in the green room mccain should move on and stop asking questions about libya.
's conference. republicans say u.n. ambassador susan rice they believe is unfit for promotion. that growing debate straight ahead. gregg: and the president is meeting with business execs at the white house today. he says the middle class is his top priority but, will the president's policies allow those ceo's to hire new employees? martha: and the mystery of the massive home explosion in indiana now deepening as another house explodes in a completely different neighborhood. >> the ones that happened in indianapolis, those had heavy fire along with the explosions. this type here, it's undetermined what caused it because there was no fire with this explosion. it's that time of year. time for campbell's green bean casserole. you'll find the recipe at campbellskitchen.com. ♪ campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do. no one says th anymore, mom. [ woman ] raise the roof! ah? raise the roof! [ male announcer ] it's our biggest toy rollback of the year. find hundreds of rollbacks on the season's hottest toys in stores now, from america's gift headquarters, walmart. martha: well, police in hende
out the term al-qaeda and inserted extremist in the talking points that went to eventually susan rice and told americans? who edited those talking points? that was the question given to david petraeus on friday, no answer there. >> clayton: we thought we'd get it, so friday we didn't get it. thought maybe saturday, we didn't get it. sunday, no answer, but new insight into exactly some of the editing process done with the talking points and a statement from the white house deputy national security advisor, ben rose, the only edit made by the white house and state department was to change the word consulate to the word diplomatic facility. those are two words. since the facility in benghazi was not formally a consulate. we were presented with points, and the only edit made by the white house was the factual edit how to refer to the facility. no mention though of removing al-qaeda and putting in the term extremist. so still we have a gray area, something in between the white house and the intelligence community somebody edited it. >> so petraeus testified on friday, al-qaeda was a part o
that we might see tpulg those spots, chris? >> the most interesting one, i guess, is susan rice,s u.n. ambassador was considered one of the frontrunners to be the secretary of state, very popular with president, has enormous regard for her: she was one of his top policy advisers during hit 2008 campaign. this is susan rice that did the five sunday shows a few days after the libya attack in which she put out the story, apparently they claim still these were the cia talking points that this was all a spontaneous protest over the video that went bad, but there's been a lot of contradiction of that. i think she'd have a tough time getting confirmed. she might get confirmed but it would be a real battle and the president has to decide whether he wants to have that battle. somebody else that is clear is desperate for the job is massachusetts senator john kerry who of course played mitt romney in the debate. one of the questions there, i think he would sale through the senate club, on the other hand i'm not so sure that they want to lose a senate seat. they may feel with all the pick ups
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 67 (some duplicates have been removed)